-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Micheal Jackson?
- Thread starter tillman1
- Start date
Disney2002
New Member
With his massive legal troubles, I would highly doubt it. I believe he requires special permission to leave the state.
MKCP 1985
Well-Known Member
No, tillman1 is right. Roger Friedman of foxnews.com reported yesterday that the king of pop spent a good amount of time in the last couple of weeks at Walt Disney World. Here is an excerpt:
"Jackson, by the way, has spent the last couple of weeks in Orlando, Fla., renting a swell small mansion from local time-share king David Siegel and hanging out at Disney World."
I didn't see him when I was there, but there were just a few people running around the parks on Easter weekend!
"Jackson, by the way, has spent the last couple of weeks in Orlando, Fla., renting a swell small mansion from local time-share king David Siegel and hanging out at Disney World."
I didn't see him when I was there, but there were just a few people running around the parks on Easter weekend!
Disney2002
New Member
Personally, I think any public appearance by this man are totally inappropriate at this point.
Disney2002
New Member
Well, now that all his rides have been repossessed....
ha ha ha!
ha ha ha!
civileng68
Account Suspended
leave him alone
I seriously don't think that's a fair statement. Sure the guy is odd, and sure he's been accused of doing something, but I think we should wait and see what the trial comes out with first.
I seriously wish people would leave him alone, he's screwed up enough already and people have absolutely no heart that are bashing him personally as much. No celebrity takes personal beatings like he does. His entire life has been hell and if he molested those children, he should be locked away forever, but regardless, this trial is not over, and until it is, people should have heart enough to leave him alone.
It sure is funny that everyone accuses Jackson because he looks and acts wierd, yet there's no evidence (and don't bring that DA's evidence out, that guy is out for blood because Jackson wrote a song about him years back). I want to see what the judge takes as evidence. Anyways, it's funny that with no hard evidence he's guilty in people's minds, yet, OJ who had hard facts against him, even DNA got off and was cheered as he left the court room as a free man.
Absolutely disgusting. People should have a heart of sympathy for people.
I seriously don't think that's a fair statement. Sure the guy is odd, and sure he's been accused of doing something, but I think we should wait and see what the trial comes out with first.
I seriously wish people would leave him alone, he's screwed up enough already and people have absolutely no heart that are bashing him personally as much. No celebrity takes personal beatings like he does. His entire life has been hell and if he molested those children, he should be locked away forever, but regardless, this trial is not over, and until it is, people should have heart enough to leave him alone.
It sure is funny that everyone accuses Jackson because he looks and acts wierd, yet there's no evidence (and don't bring that DA's evidence out, that guy is out for blood because Jackson wrote a song about him years back). I want to see what the judge takes as evidence. Anyways, it's funny that with no hard evidence he's guilty in people's minds, yet, OJ who had hard facts against him, even DNA got off and was cheered as he left the court room as a free man.
Absolutely disgusting. People should have a heart of sympathy for people.
Spectroman2003
New Member
Michael Jackson and all those kids? Let's hope him and Tigger didn't meet....BTW, that was a joke but I'm expecting a lot back on that one.
civileng68
Account Suspended
.
Yes I also await the flame-thrower for my stance and opinion posted above.
Yes I also await the flame-thrower for my stance and opinion posted above.
JackSkellington
Active Member
I agree with you he doesn't need to be bashed any more than he already is been. He is a human too, just reaching out to find who he really is. What he needs to do in life.
1disneydood
Active Member
Isn't it odd that they take down Janet's 50 earspirations statue but allow Michael (accused child groper) into the parks. Where's the reasoning behind that. :hammer:
Spectroman2003
New Member
Although I agree with you, what do you mean allowed. If they said "no you can't come in" that would be a Public relations disaster that no one could even dream about. They let all sorts of people in there.
1disneydood
Active Member
It's like an accused murderer at a gun show. Sure, they aren't convicted YET but they still shouldn't be around there.
I love his older hits, but Michael just scares me nowadays. Esp. for my kid. I'd rather be at the park with OJ. At least I wouldn't be in fear of my child being groped. Dahmer and Bundy don't scare me as much as a child molester.
civileng68
Account Suspended
.
If he's not convicted yet, then why shouldn't he be allowed in? First of all, do you know how many people come in those parks that are on trial for the same thing as he is? The only difference is that you know of him because he's famous. Trust me, there's much worse in the park that him. In fact, there's probably employees in the parks that you wouldnt want with your children, yet you let them take pictures in costumes with your kids.
He's not convicted and truthfully, you may not want to acknowledge it, but there's not even any evidence against him and personally if you saw what they did to his ranch you'd ralize this is a personal issue with the D.A. and Jackson more than an actual issue of Jackson doing something wrong.
They got a warrant to search the home, and instead they destroyed it and "supposedly" bugged the place. It's just not right.
Anyone can be accused of anything, just remember that when you think of how harshly you judge him. Your best friend can accuse you and sue you of molesting their children when all you did was hold them and kiss them. Just remember that.
If Jackson were "normal" looking he wouldn't be treated like this. However, if he's guilty he's guilty, period. I just think people are really crossing the line judging him based on his "weird" factor when there are so many "weird" people in the world and in fact, he's not been convicted of anything.
Again though, do you know how many CONVICTED and REGISTERED ______ offenders there are in the parks at any given time, yet you are wanting one who is ACCUSED with no hard evidence publicly known to be restricted from being at the parks?
If he's not convicted yet, then why shouldn't he be allowed in? First of all, do you know how many people come in those parks that are on trial for the same thing as he is? The only difference is that you know of him because he's famous. Trust me, there's much worse in the park that him. In fact, there's probably employees in the parks that you wouldnt want with your children, yet you let them take pictures in costumes with your kids.
He's not convicted and truthfully, you may not want to acknowledge it, but there's not even any evidence against him and personally if you saw what they did to his ranch you'd ralize this is a personal issue with the D.A. and Jackson more than an actual issue of Jackson doing something wrong.
They got a warrant to search the home, and instead they destroyed it and "supposedly" bugged the place. It's just not right.
Anyone can be accused of anything, just remember that when you think of how harshly you judge him. Your best friend can accuse you and sue you of molesting their children when all you did was hold them and kiss them. Just remember that.
If Jackson were "normal" looking he wouldn't be treated like this. However, if he's guilty he's guilty, period. I just think people are really crossing the line judging him based on his "weird" factor when there are so many "weird" people in the world and in fact, he's not been convicted of anything.
Again though, do you know how many CONVICTED and REGISTERED ______ offenders there are in the parks at any given time, yet you are wanting one who is ACCUSED with no hard evidence publicly known to be restricted from being at the parks?